Senior PMO officials swung into action within hours of the I&B Ministry issuing a press release that turned almost instantly turned controversial as a government effort aimed at disciplining the media.

Those familiar with the developments told ET that this was flagged off at the highest levels, especially the prospect of large scale media protests as the press release drew no distinction between fake news and inaccuracies in reporting.

By Tuesday morning, it was decided that fake news was not an issue in the government domain, but a subject for the Press Council of India and other self-regulatory bodies to handle. The PMO, a senior official said, was clear it did not want a controversy on freedom of speech in its hands.

The government lost no time thereafter to announce withdrawal of the I&B press release in an effort to end an impending crisis. “The Prime Minister has directed that the press release regarding fake news be withdrawn and the matter should only be addressed in the Press Council of India,” said an official statement.

This was the third instance in one week that the PMO had to intervene -- other two being the CBSE question paper leak and Dalit protests arising from a Supreme Court order on the SC/ST Act.

The punitive measures in the I&B Ministry press release included a graded system of derecognizing journalists accredited to the Press Information Bureau, a wing of the I&B Ministry responsible for dissemination of the government news content and maintaining daily interface with journalists as well news organisations.

One piece of confirmed fake news would lead to six-month suspension of PIB accreditation, second violation would attract one-year suspension and a third would entail permanent revocation of the privilege. A journalist is eligible for accreditation only after of five years full-time reporting in a recognized media organization.

The new guidelines evoked a flurry of reactions of social media and very soon, it turned political with the government being accused of trying to muzzle the media.

Even after the withdrawal of the press release, the opposition refused to let up the pressure. The Congress wanted to know how could the PM not be aware of the move.

As it turns out, the Ministry claims it did carry out consultations for about two months. Yet, the official channels appeared unaware of such a press release making its way to the public domain.

Later, Irani was compelled to do some damage control herself. She took to Twitter asking journalist bodies or organisation/s wanting to give suggestions so that the menace of ‘fake news’ could be ‘fought together’ and uphold ethical journalism.

"Clearly the I&B ministry and the Prime Ministers' Office were not on the same page here. But there is no doubt that the centre wants to crack down on fake news. It just wants the timing to be right and wants no criticism,” said an official.

.@MIB_India is more than happy to engage with journalist body or organisation/s wanting to give suggestions so that… https://t.co/QXRCV3eZH6

Press Council Chairman Justice C K Prasad said only an independent body can decide what is fake news . "We don't grant or revoke accreditation. We maintain what you call ethics in journalism, the code of conduct. If someone comes up with fake news, it is surely a violation of that code of conduct…but suppose a fake news report has led to communal tension at one place, that has to dealt with severely. Fake news is a global menace and if any government intends to take remedial steps to check its spread, per se, there is nothign wrong or obnoxious about it, provided the authority to decide the truthfulness or otherwise of an allegation of fake news is entrusted to an independent, statutory body like the Press Council of India. "

Commenting on the need to address fake news, senior advocate Harish Salve who has earlier assisted the NBA in writing the broadcasters's code said it was necessary to have a "robust jury of peers that can keep the errant ones in check.

"Media however has been having a free run on people's reputations that is something that needs to be put down. There is much greater latitude when it comes to public affairs. We have to support freedom of speech but media has to be responsible because it is expanding fast. We have 500 channels and all of them want to break news. Some of them have started making news in this process at a very dear cost. That is the problem. Having government control on media is worse than having having a crazy media but a crazy media is not good for democracy."